Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40283147›Full record

ArticleLife (Basel, Switzerland)2025

Prediction of Early Diagnosis in Ovarian Cancer Patients Using Machine Learning Approaches with Boruta and Advanced Feature Selection.

Tuğçe Öznacar, Tunç Güler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Life (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Tuğçe ÖznacarDepartment of Biostatistics, Ankara Medipol University, Ankara 06570, Turkey.ORCID 0000-0003-0364-0401
Tunç GülerDepartment of Medical Oncology, Park Hayat Hospital, Afyonkarahisar 03100, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesOvarian cancer continues to be one of the most prevalent gynecological cancers diagnosed. Early detection is highly critical for increasing survival chances. This research aims to assess the feature extraction process from various machine learning techniques for better modelling of ovarian cancer and the selection process in ovarian cancer analysis. By eliminating irrelevant features, this approach could guide clinicians towards more accurate results and optimize diagnostic precision.

methodsThis study included both patients with and without ovarian cancer, creating a dataset containing 50 independent variables/features. Eight machine learning algorithms: Random Forest, XGBoost, CatBoost, Decision Tree, K-Nearest Neighbors, Naive Bayes, Gradient Boosting, and Support Vector Machine, were evaluated alongside four feature selection techniques: Boruta, PCA, RFE, and MI. Metrics performance has been evaluated to obtain the best possible combination for diagnosis.

resultsThese results were obtained using these methods with a significantly reduced number of features. Random Forest and CatBoost's performances demonstrated significant differences in contrast to other algorithms (respectively, AUC 0.94% and 0.95%). On the other hand, feature selection methods such as Boruta and RFE consistently reflected higher AUC and accuracy scores than the others.

conclusionsThis study highlights the importance of choosing appropriate machine learning algorithms and feature selection techniques for ovarian cancer diagnosis. Boruta and RFE showed high accuracy. By reducing the number of features from 50 to the most relevant ones, clinicians can make more precise diagnoses, enhance patient outcomes, and reduce unnecessary tests.

Indexed as

BorutaCatBoostfeature selectionmachine learningrecursive feature elimination

Identifiers

PMID40283147
PMCPMC12029098

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.